MH17 -- Looks like it might have been the Russians

[Loren Pechtel]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35654692?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link

Admittedly the prime source here isn't exactly ironclad.

 

[aeebee50]

I am glad I missed this flight.

 

[Bronzeage]

It's not really a surprise and whether it was Russian troops or Ukrainian forces, it's a same difference situation.

The only real question was if this was a strategic decision or an in the field fuck up. Fuck ups happen all the time and no more explanation is needed, but if it was a strategic decision, then what was was the goal of this strategy?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Frigging Dutch. They got to another one.

 

[bilby]

It's not really a surprise and whether it was Russian troops or Ukrainian forces, it's a same difference situation.

The only real question was if this was a strategic decision or an in the field fuck up. Fuck ups happen all the time and no more explanation is needed, but if it was a strategic decision, then what was was the goal of this strategy?

Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

Most of the people on the plane likely didn't know that they would overfly Ukraine. The parochial farm-boys on the ground sure as shit didn't know that international flights with no connection to either Russia or Ukraine routinely flew over their heads. They saw a plane on the radar, knew it wasn't theirs, and so concluded it must belong to the enemy - after all, who else would be flying in the area? - so they shot it down.

That's what happens when you give dumb-fucks access to powerful weapons systems.

Bear in mind that these are people whose knowledge of the wider world is so limited that they think the Donbass is a place worth fighting and dying for.

On an historical scale, it wasn't even a particularly monumental fuck up - there have been fuck-ups in the past that resulted in millions of deaths, so a few hundred barely makes a blip.

I was about to type "Even the wildest conspiracy theorist couldn't come up with a strategic reason for anyone in the Donbass to want to shoot down a Malaysian airliner full of Dutch citizens", but then I remembered that there is literally no limit to the batshittery that conspiracy theorists can generate, so I shall limit myself to saying that no sane person can think of a strategic reason to have done this on the part of any person who was within 1,000km of the airliner when it was shot down.

 

[Bronzeage]

It's not really a surprise and whether it was Russian troops or Ukrainian forces, it's a same difference situation.

The only real question was if this was a strategic decision or an in the field fuck up. Fuck ups happen all the time and no more explanation is needed, but if it was a strategic decision, then what was was the goal of this strategy?

Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

Most of the people on the plane likely didn't know that they would overfly Ukraine. The parochial farm-boys on the ground sure as shit didn't know that international flights with no connection to either Russia or Ukraine routinely flew over their heads. They saw a plane on the radar, knew it wasn't theirs, and so concluded it must belong to the enemy - after all, who else would be flying in the area? - so they shot it down.

That's what happens when you give dumb-fucks access to powerful weapons systems.

Bear in mind that these are people whose knowledge of the wider world is so limited that they think the Donbass is a place worth fighting and dying for.

On an historical scale, it wasn't even a particularly monumental fuck up - there have been fuck-ups in the past that resulted in millions of deaths, so a few hundred barely makes a blip.

I was about to type "Even the wildest conspiracy theorist couldn't come up with a strategic reason for anyone in the Donbass to want to shoot down a Malaysian airliner full of Dutch citizens", but then I remembered that there is literally no limit to the batshittery that conspiracy theorists can generate, so I shall limit myself to saying that no sane person can think of a strategic reason to have done this on the part of any person who was within 1,000km of the airliner when it was shot down.

While we're on the subject of strange things that happen to Malaysian Airline jets, it's been determined that the other Malaysian jet that was lost in the Pacific had to be under controlled flight for several hours before it finally hit the water. There are no scenarios which allow for all known circumstances, that don't require use of the word bizarre.

 

[bilby]

Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

Most of the people on the plane likely didn't know that they would overfly Ukraine. The parochial farm-boys on the ground sure as shit didn't know that international flights with no connection to either Russia or Ukraine routinely flew over their heads. They saw a plane on the radar, knew it wasn't theirs, and so concluded it must belong to the enemy - after all, who else would be flying in the area? - so they shot it down.

That's what happens when you give dumb-fucks access to powerful weapons systems.

Bear in mind that these are people whose knowledge of the wider world is so limited that they think the Donbass is a place worth fighting and dying for.

On an historical scale, it wasn't even a particularly monumental fuck up - there have been fuck-ups in the past that resulted in millions of deaths, so a few hundred barely makes a blip.

I was about to type "Even the wildest conspiracy theorist couldn't come up with a strategic reason for anyone in the Donbass to want to shoot down a Malaysian airliner full of Dutch citizens", but then I remembered that there is literally no limit to the batshittery that conspiracy theorists can generate, so I shall limit myself to saying that no sane person can think of a strategic reason to have done this on the part of any person who was within 1,000km of the airliner when it was shot down.

While we're on the subject of strange things that happen to Malaysian Airline jets, it's been determined that the other Malaysian jet that was lost in the Pacific had to be under controlled flight for several hours before it finally hit the water. There are no scenarios which allow for all known circumstances, that don't require use of the word bizarre.

Hmmm. Pretty much all of that is incorrect. Including your choice of ocean.

MH370 is a mystery, not so much because the facts are bizarre, but because there are so few of them. Almost everything that has been 'determined' is speculation; and speculation can be as bizarre as the speculator likes.

What is known:

The plane disappeared from ATC secondary radar shortly after departing the Singapore FIR at the border with the Ho Chi Minh (Saigon) FIR near waypoint IGARI, 39 minutes after departing KUL.
No further transponder signals were received from the flight.
There are strong hints that Malaysian and Indonesian military primary radar may have tracked the flight crossing back over the Malay peninsula along the Malaysia/Thailand border, and out over the Straits of Malacca, to the vicinity of waypoints VAMPI and GIVAL, and then north of Banda Aceh to around waypoint IGREX; The Malay airforce have confirmed the track to GIVAL, but the Indonesians have not as far as I know, officially confirmed the north-bound leg towards IGREX.
Data from the Inmarsat satellite communications system indicates that the aircraft's satellite transceiver was operational at hourly intervals for a further 5 and a half hours, and the distance from the satellite can be plotted at roughly hourly intervals during this time; From this information it is most likely that the aircraft flew a steady course into the southern Indian ocean.
A 777 is more than capable of flying for that length of time on a steady course with no intervention from any person on board. It can also be pre-programmed to make course and altitude changes at a number of points.
Wreckage recovered from Réunion island 16 months later is confirmed to be part of the missing aircraft; The recovery date and location are consistent with the aircraft crashing into the Indian Ocean in the area suggested by the satellite data.

Those are the facts, few though they are.

They are consistent with deliberate action by one or both pilots for unknown motives; They are also consistent with a number of accident scenarios of low probability. With only one datum, ruling out the unlikely would be a mistake, so those remain on the table.

Until and unless the aircraft is recovered and examined, we shall probably never know any more; Given the size and remoteness of the search area, it is certainly possible that the bulk of the aircraft will never be found. Even if it is, the DFDR may tell us little we don't already know; and the CVR will only tell us what sounds were heard in the cockpit in the last hour or two of the flight - which is unlikely to be very informative.

Feel free to hang any narrative on these facts that you like, however bizarre. But there is nothing here that allows us to determine that the aircraft was under 'controlled flight' at any time after it passed IGARI, and entered Vietnamese airspace, although it seems likely that it was controlled at least as far as the Malacca Strait, as the flightpath up to that point would require a lot of effort to program into the autopilot. From that point onwards, it seems unlikely anyone was controlling the aircraft, as it seems to have flown an undeviating course - which is characteristic of flight under autopilot; although of course a pilot could fly such a course if he chose.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's not really a surprise and whether it was Russian troops or Ukrainian forces, it's a same difference situation.

The only real question was if this was a strategic decision or an in the field fuck up. Fuck ups happen all the time and no more explanation is needed, but if it was a strategic decision, then what was was the goal of this strategy?

I see no reason to think it's more than a field fuckup.

 

[barbos]

 

[Will Wiley]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35654692?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link

Admittedly the prime source here isn't exactly ironclad.

young man from England who works out of his loungeroom.

The source is an unemployed young man from England who works out of his loungeroom.who has some how become a "journalist".

It was founded by British journalist Eliot Higgins.

there is not one scrap of evidence that places the 53rd brigade anywhere near Ukraine.

This Dutch blogger is one of many who exposes this nonsense. HisEnglish is not the best but his case is very good.

Bellingcat uses assumptions to make claims instead of irrefutable proof!

In the Bellingcat narrative Russian BUK number 3×2 was transported in a military convoy from its home base in Kursk via border town Millerovo and via Donetsk to its launch position south of Snizhne. The convoy left Kursk at June 23, 2014.

The convoy consisted of mainly vehicles of the 2nd battalion of the 53rd anti-aircraft brigade . Bellingcat made a nice overview of the route.

BUK 3×2 is the BUK which according Bellingcat, based on photos published by Paris Match, was used to shot down MH17.

However, there are no photos nor videos which confirm BUK 3×2 was near the Russian/Ukraine border town of Millerovo, despite several claims by Bellingcat.

The author did four attempts to get a comment from Eliot Higgins on why he states BUK 3×2 has been in Millerovo without photo or video confirming that claim. However Higgins decided to not respond to request from the author.

So I tried to get an answer from one one of the anonymous authors of Bellingcat, the Dutch guy called Daniel. I had a long discussion on Twitter. Again I asked: why does BC claim BUK 3×2 was in Millerovo while there is no photo proof?

I did not get an anwer other than ‘it is logical BUK 3×2 was in Millerovo’.

 

[Will Wiley]

It's not really a surprise and whether it was Russian troops or Ukrainian forces, it's a same difference situation.

The only real question was if this was a strategic decision or an in the field fuck up. Fuck ups happen all the time and no more explanation is needed, but if it was a strategic decision, then what was was the goal of this strategy?

The Ukrainians were getting their ass kicked by those in the east who had refused to accept the government which had come to power in a coup where the democratically elected leader had been ousted.

But ultimately if there is any incident in Eurasia that concerns the US then we don't have to guess. When we have been told what the goal is by those who call the shots then there is no real reason to speculate. Everything in Eurasia is subject to the overall goal.

In foreign policy, the neoconservatives' main concern is to prevent the development of a new rival. Defense Planning Guidance, a document prepared during 1992 by Under Secretary for Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz, is regarded by Distinguished Professor of the Humanities John McGowan at the University of North Carolina as the "quintessential statement of neoconservative thought". The report says:[78]

"Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power."

It can't be stated any plainer.
So...what we are seeing with MH17 is secrecy, delays, avoidance. Nothing will ever be done. A guy who couldn't get a job, who works out of his loungeroom will be elevated by the BBC to a "journalist" and referenced.
One of your own outstanding investigative journalists has already basically told us what happened.

The honest people in American intelligence know what happened, but as with Iraq, they cannot say.
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/10/13/mh-17-the-dog-still-not-barking/
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/07/09/mh-17-case-slips-into-propaganda-fog/

If it comes out that a rogue element of the Ukrainian army shot down this plane it will be too damaging for American interests. And we know for certain what American interests are because they have told us

 

[Will Wiley]

It's not really a surprise and whether it was Russian troops or Ukrainian forces, it's a same difference situation.

The only real question was if this was a strategic decision or an in the field fuck up. Fuck ups happen all the time and no more explanation is needed, but if it was a strategic decision, then what was was the goal of this strategy?

I see no reason to think it's more than a field fuckup.

What so you think the 53 brigade came in from Russia without the Telar that would be needed to direct any missile and shot the plane down in a fuck up, despite their training?
What evidence do you have that the 53 brigade was anywhere near the Ukraine. You have none. But why should evidence influence what you believe Loren?

 

[Jayjay]

I see no reason to think it's more than a field fuckup.

What so you think the 53 brigade came in from Russia without the Telar that would be needed to direct any missile and shot the plane down in a fuck up, despite their training?

What do you mean "without the Telar"? The 3x2 BUk that was with 53rd Bridage is clearly a Telar.

This is the TELAR vehicle (source):

This is the non-TELAR version (i.e. a TEL, as the letters AR stand for "and radar"):

And finally, this is the BUK 3x2 as photographed in Russia with the 53rd Brigade convoy:

Looks like a TELAR to me. As do the pictures of the alleged BUK in Ukraine. This is the first time I hear the claim that the BUK wasn't a TELAR unit, what's your source for that?

What evidence do you have that the 53 brigade was anywhere near the Ukraine. You have none. But why should evidence influence what you believe Loren?

The entire bridage doesn't have to be in Ukraine. Just one BUK and a few operators. And of course, pictures and videos of the BUK that looks very much like the one that 53rd Brigade has are evidence that not only was the 53rd Brigade "anywhere near" but in Ukraine.

 

[Jayjay]

young man from England who works out of his loungeroom.

The source is an unemployed young man from England who works out of his loungeroom.who has some how become a "journalist".

It was founded by British journalist Eliot Higgins.

there is not one scrap of evidence that places the 53rd brigade anywhere near Ukraine.

This Dutch blogger is one of many who exposes this nonsense. HisEnglish is not the best but his case is very good.

Bellingcat uses assumptions to make claims instead of irrefutable proof!

In the Bellingcat narrative Russian BUK number 3×2 was transported in a military convoy from its home base in Kursk via border town Millerovo and via Donetsk to its launch position south of Snizhne. The convoy left Kursk at June 23, 2014.

The convoy consisted of mainly vehicles of the 2nd battalion of the 53rd anti-aircraft brigade . Bellingcat made a nice overview of the route.

BUK 3×2 is the BUK which according Bellingcat, based on photos published by Paris Match, was used to shot down MH17.

However, there are no photos nor videos which confirm BUK 3×2 was near the Russian/Ukraine border town of Millerovo, despite several claims by Bellingcat.

The author did four attempts to get a comment from Eliot Higgins on why he states BUK 3×2 has been in Millerovo without photo or video confirming that claim. However Higgins decided to not respond to request from the author.

So I tried to get an answer from one one of the anonymous authors of Bellingcat, the Dutch guy called Daniel. I had a long discussion on Twitter. Again I asked: why does BC claim BUK 3×2 was in Millerovo while there is no photo proof?

I did not get an anwer other than ‘it is logical BUK 3×2 was in Millerovo’.

Yes, it is indeed logical.

The 3x2 BUK was filmed and photographed with the convoy in other places. The same convoy was seen in Millerovo. Therefore, it's reasonable to assume that the 3x2 BUK was also there unless you have some better theory why it wouldn't.

 

[Will Wiley]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35654692?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link

Admittedly the prime source here isn't exactly ironclad.

What we have is a situation where only the Ukraine had functioning buks. The deputy head pf the Dutch parliament confirmed this.


Despite this the Ukraine was made a party to the investigation with power to veto anything it did not like from reports.

Secondly we have the Ukrainian intelligence services or other anonymous people posting photos and videos and intercepted calls on the internet that have been shown to be manipulated and photoshopped and basically fraudulent.

Russia is the only country that has supplied any radar data. The Ukraine have supplied no radar data at all.
What sort of investigation is this where the only country with functioning buk missile launchers is part of the investigating team and supplies no radar data, even though the whole thing happened within their borders?

Within hours of the plane coming down we were all told that Russia and the anti-coup forces in the East were behind it. This has been repeated over and over and over. But if we look at the evidence it does not support that at all.

The plane was likely shot down by a rogue element of the Ukrainian army operating under oligarch Ihor Kolmoisky (who was subsequently removed). But if this ever came to light it would be disastrous for the new NATO friendly government, who came to power after a violent coup which ousted a democratically elected leader, and was elected when large portions of the Ukraine did not participate in the elections because of the war.
NATO and the USA must quite understandably cover up what happened.
So we are told over and over that Putin did it, and we are commanded to accept photos and videos supplied by Ukrainian intelligence as proof of this.

 

[Will Wiley]

The 3x2 BUK was filmed and photographed with the convoy in other places.

It may have been seen 300 or 400 hundred kilometres in side Russia with some of the vehicles

The same convoy was seen in Millerovo.

Except it's not the same convoy, but nice sleight of hand
Just because Bellingcat tell you it's the same convoy doesn't mean you have to swallow it

 

[bilby]

Meh.

Who gives a shit who did it?

Someone fucked up royally, and hundreds died.

It was a massive fuck up.

Lots of completely uninvolved people died.

Because morons think the Donbass is worth fighting for.

It's not.

Fuck the lot of them. And double fuck the armchair warriors who want to score points for their team off the back of this tragedy.

You are all fucking scum, and need to take a good long look at yourselves.

Arseholes.

 

[barbos]

Meh.

Who gives a shit who did it?

Someone fucked up royally, and hundreds died.

EU and US fucked up royally when they supported violent regime change, the rest just follows from that.

 

[Jayjay]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35654692?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link

Admittedly the prime source here isn't exactly ironclad.

What we have is a situation where only the Ukraine had functioning buks. The deputy head pf the Dutch parliament confirmed this.

View attachment 5875

That's misquoted. The report he is referring to only says that the there is no evidence of separatists having access to a BUK. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and in any case it is more likely that the shooters were Russian and not separatists.

Pieter Omtzigt himself corrected the misquote.

Despite this the Ukraine was made a party to the investigation with power to veto anything it did not like from reports.

This is false. Records show that Ukraine did not have a veto on the report, most of their requests for revision were overuled. The country who had most input and was able to get most changes included into the Dutch Safety Board report was Russia, by a very large margin.

Secondly we have the Ukrainian intelligence services or other anonymous people posting photos and videos and intercepted calls on the internet that have been shown to be manipulated and photoshopped and basically fraudulent.

Interesting, because here we have a thread that has been going on for a long time, yet you were unable to show any of the photos as fraudulent or manipulated. On the other hand a lot of the evidence from Russia such as its falsely dated satellite photos have been shown to be utterly false. Go back and re-read last couple of dozen pages before repeating the same falsehoods.

Russia is the only country that has supplied any radar data. The Ukraine have supplied no radar data at all.
What sort of investigation is this where the only country with functioning buk missile launchers is part of the investigating team and supplies no radar data, even though the whole thing happened within their borders?

This is also false. From the DSB report:



Neither Russia nor Ukraine provided primary data, but at least Ukraine provided secondary data. This is particularly telling because Russia in its big press conference used radar data to claim that there were Ukrainian jets in the airspace. It's unbelievable that Russia would then refuse to release any of the raw data, pretending that they were deleted (which is itself a violation of ICANN rules).

Within hours of the plane coming down we were all told that Russia and the anti-coup forces in the East were behind it. This has been repeated over and over and over. But if we look at the evidence it does not support that at all.

THere is massive evidence supporting Russian involvement. And most importantly, there are several independent lines of evidence that point to the same conclusion. On the other hand, Russian propagandists have been just throwing conspiracy theories that are all inconsistent wth each other. This Ihor Klmoisky bullshit seems to be the latest gem thrown for the useful idiots in the West.

Summa summarum: Do some fact checking before you post next time.

 

[Jayjay]

It may have been seen 300 or 400 hundred kilometres in side Russia with some of the vehicles

The same convoy was seen in Millerovo.

Except it's not the same convoy, but nice sleight of hand
Just because Bellingcat tell you it's the same convoy doesn't mean you have to swallow it

And just because Russian propaganda tells you Putin's farts smell like roses, doesn't mean you have to believe it. The convoy has at least one same truck that was seen in a convoy with BUK 3x2. And if you've seen the Millerovo video, you'll notice that some of the vehicles have been covered... a smart precaution if you are about to smuggle them to Ukraine. One of those vehicles under the cover could have easily been the BUK in question.